Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to intervene in treatment decisions for Baby Jane Doe, an infant born with severe congenital defects, is lauded. The ruling, reached after detailed discussion with medical, clerical, and lay advisors, supports three lower court actions. The parents are considered to be the appropriate decision makers rather than the Surgeon General, government, or right-to-life lawyers who demonstrate little concern for the anguish of the parents. Current government policies in such cases are seen as conflicting with budgetary proposals to reduce funds for childhood immunization and nutrition programs. (KIE abstract)
